Türk Politik Sisteminde Merkezileşme Eğilimi ve Yeni Anayasa Çalışmaları

Yıl 2015, , 337 - 351, 01.12.2015

Devrim Özkan

https://doi.org/10.21547/jss.256768

Öz

Türk politik sistemindeki merkezileşme eğilimi, yirminci yüzyılın başından günümüze kadar, ortaya çıkan tüm politik, iktisadi ve kültürel problemlerde, başat bir önem arz etmektedir. Bu çalışmada, öncelikle, Türk politik sistemindeki merkezileşme eğiliminin sebepleri ele alınmaktadır. Zira gerek güncel, gerekse yapısal pek çok sosyal problemin çözüme kavuşturulmasının önündeki başlıca engel merkezileşmiş politik yapılardır. Kuşkusuz birey, modern politikada, vazgeçilmez bir biçimde, dikkate alınması gereken bir öznedir. Bu nedenle, bireyin politik sistemde nasıl konumlanacağı, hayati bir önem arz eder. Birey, şüphesiz, kimliğini diğer bireyler ile eşgüdümlü bir biçimde inşa ettiğinden dolayı, politikada konumlanırken de diğerleri ile koordineli davranır. Birbiri ile bağlantısını devletin vasıtası ile sağlayan bireylerden oluşan bir toplumunda, totaliter yönetimlerin egemen olması kaçınılmazdır. Dolayısıyla gerek bireylerin, gerekse komünitelerin, politik sistemde, özgürlük, refah ve istikrarı temin edecek bir tarzda nasıl konumlanacakları Türk politik sisteminin en önemli meselelerindendir

Anahtar Kelimeler

Karşı ağırlık, Türkiye, merkezileşme, yeni anayasa, komünite

Tendency of Centralization and New Constitution Efforts in Turkish Political System

Öz

Since the beginning of the twentieth century, the tendency of centralization in Turkish political system has played a significant role in all the problems related to politics, economics and culture. This study addresses the causes of the tendency of centralization in Turkish political system because centralized political mechanisms are the main obstacles to solve many problems such as actual and structural ones. Certainly, individuals should be treated as necessary agents in modern politics. Therefore, the place of individuals in a political system has a vital importance. As individuals construct their identities coordinately with other individuals, they behave coordinately with others in politics, as well. in a society where individuals connect with each other via state makes totalitarian regimes inevitable. In this regard, how individuals and communities will be provided with freedom, welfare and stabilization in political mechanisms is one of the most crucial issues of Turkish political system

Anahtar Kelimeler

Counterweight, Turkey, centralization, new constitution, community

Kaynakça

• Burke, E. (2009) [1790]. Reflections on the Revolution in France. Oxford: Oxford
• De Montesquieu, B. (1989) [1748] The Spirit of the Laws. Anne M. Cohler, Basia Carolyn Miller and Harold Samuel Stone (trans. and edit.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• De Tocqueville, A. (1856). The Old Regime and the Revolution. John Bonner (trans.). New York: Harper & Brothers.
• De Tocqueville, A. (2010). [1835-1840] Democracy in America. Eduardo Nolla, (edit.) & James T. Schleifer (trans.). Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, Inc.
• Gillespie, M. A. (2008). The Theological Origins of Modernity. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
• Goffman, E. (1958). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, NJ: Anchor.
• Goldstein, J. & RAYNER, J. (1994). The Politics of Identity in Late Modern Society. Theory and Society, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 367-384.
• Habermas, J. (1984) [1981]. Theory of Communicative Action Volume One: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Thomas A. McCarthy (trans.). Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press.
• Habermas, J. (1987) [1981]. Theory of Communicative Action Volume Two: Liveworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Thomas A. McCarthy (trans.). Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press.
• Hayek, F.A. (1962) [1944]. The Road to Serfdom. London: Routledge.
• Hayek, F. A. (1945). The Use of Knowledge in Society. The American Economic Review, Vol. 35, No. 4., pp. 519-530.
• Hegel, G. W. F. (1977) [1807]. Phenomenology of Spırit. A. V. Miller (trans.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hobbes, T. (1991) [1651]. Leviathan. Richard Tuck (edit.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Hume, D. (1985) [1739]. Treatise of Human Nature. London: Penguin Books.
• Kymlicka, W. (1995). Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Right. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Lewis, P. (2007). The Cambridge Introduction to Modernism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Locke, J. (1988) [1689]. Two Treatises of Civil Government. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Machiavelli, N. (2003) [1532]. The Prince. George Bull (trans.). London: Penguin Books.
• Mardin, Ş. (1969). Power, Civil Society and Culture in the Ottoman Empire. Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 258-281.
• Mardin, Ş. (1971). Ideology and Religion in the Turkish Revolution. International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 197-211.
• Nisbet, R. (1953). The Quest for Community: A Study in the Ethics of Order and Freedom. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Nisbet, R. (1969). Social Change and History: Aspects of the Western Theory of Development. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Nisbet, R. (1980). History of the Idea of Progress. New York: Basic Books.
• Nisbet, R. (1986). The Making of Modern Society. New York: New York
• Nisbet, R. (1988). The Present Age: Progress and Anarchy in Modern America. New York: Harper & Row.
• Rousseau, J. J. (2012). Basic Political Writings (Second Edition). Donald A. Cress & David Wootton (edit.). Cambridge, MA: Hackett Publishing.
• Tomasello, M. (2008). Origins of Human Communication. London: The MIT Press.
• Weber, M. (2008) [1908-20]. Max Weber’s Complete Writings on Academic and Political Vocations. John Dreijmanis (edit.) & Gordon C. Wells (trans.). New York: Algora Publishing.